You're quite right, it doesn't tell you what might happen in the end, though repeated currency crises could happen with or without the constitutional amendment. Or, if we assume the right chose to practise the politique du pire, they wouldn't need to call on the constitutional amendment to shrink the state and destroy redistributive policies, thus creating social unrest and leading to a football stadium "stable resolution". And, unfortunately, the PP seems animated by pretty shadowy intentions.

A great deal depends on the extent to which, among the Spanish people as a whole, the C20 history of Spain, starting from the 1930s, is now felt to be a closed book - or, to the contrary, is still unresolved and therefore alive. The right has certainly been pushing the latter term. Which is more worrying, imo, than the constitutional amendment.

Zapatero himself is proof positive that the C20 history of Spain, starting from the 1930s ... is still unresolved and therefore alive. His Law of Historical Memory is, appraised coldly, a Law of damnatio memoriae. Judge Baltasar Garzon was banished from the judicial profession for daring to open a case on Franco's crimes against humanity. The digging up of mass graves from the Civil War continues to be a contentious issue. And just like Thatcher's tories managed to insert into the British conventional wisdom the lie that Britain is no longer a class-based society, the PP and its sociological and voter base are convinced that the wounds of C20 are closed and Zapatero has reopened them, while most of the left is aware that the wounds were never closed. But, IMHO, damnatio memoriae is not the way to go and it is not even feasible since the heirs of Franco have not been defeated to the point where you can apply damnatio memoriae.

The church no longer dictates how people live - but its success in lobbying Spain's government should not be underestimated

...

The issue is power, and the Spanish church has an awful lot of it, but it lies somewhere else. Its kingdom is of this world. As a reaction to secularisation, the church has become an American-style political lobby, which no longer shepherds souls but votes. With its radio and TV stations and its vast network of schools and universities, it shapes the conservative political camp. It is its ability to deliver busloads of school children to Madrid that makes rightwing demonstrations possible and massive.

...

And this is what World Youth Day was about: the joy of triumph and the anticipation of more concessions to come from the next government. Journalists scrutinised the long and repetitive speeches of the pope as if they were all about theology, but they weren't. The medium is the message. The message is the massive presence, like a seraphic version of the International Brigades, of the Catholic church on the streets of Spain, the old faithful country gone astray.

Constitutional literalism again. What matters more, as I've said elsewhere, is the balance of power, the ideological climate, the extent to which the people are willing or not to enter into serious conflict. Which is why what Migeru says just above is more worrisome than a constitutional court.

A great deal depends on the extent to which, among the Spanish people as a whole, the C20 history of Spain, starting from the 1930s, is now felt to be a closed book - or, to the contrary, is still unresolved and therefore alive. The right has certainly been pushing the latter term. Which is more worrying, imo, than the constitutional amendment.

IMO, the constitutional amendment is more worrying BECAUSE the right has been pushing issues that keep their interpretation of "the wounds of C20" alive. It is beginning to appear that the death of Franco was more of a stragegic detante accepted by the right in recognition that they could no longer govern with such adamant defiance of others than a real victory by the left. The right may well have just been biding its time until they had the opportunity to tar the left with some bogus smear and reclaim dictatorial power. Chile may be further along in dealing with the legacy of Pinochet than is Spain in dealing with the legacy of Franco.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."